User talk:Quantumboost/Reasons Why Pathfinder Is Not Good
Additions Might add a few things I noticed if that's okay... revert if you prefer it revision-free. --Ghostwheel 08:16, April 28, 2010 (UTC) :Nah, that's fine... the more information people have, the better. --Quantumboost 18:37, April 28, 2010 (UTC) Counter Points A few opinions on your opinion. *I would like to point out that the discrepancy between casters and non-casters is not as vast as I believe you assume it to be. Firstly, while bonuses to DCs and all from racial bonuses sound crazy awesome*, it is usually only a +1, while most mundane classes have gained new powers and have a lot more class abilities on average. Also, while magicians are still the most versatile, the mundane classes have gotten better at what they specifically do; but I do feel that you would be the type to understand that Tier 1 is still Tier 1. Practically status quo; a Wizard did it. *Fighter has always sucked, but I find the new one to be much better than the existing one. So the argument doesn't really make Pathfinder worse, just kinda points out a status quo in the first place; but with archetypes and tricks, a fighter is somewhat playable. *It is also worth noting, that all things from 3.5 and 3.0 are not "backwards compatible" by default. It is still the decision of the GM to allow or disallow the use of 3e material in Pathfinder. It is technically third party material after all. *Good news is most of the good source books for Pathfinder that aren't campaign specific are usually added to their OGL site, giving the important information for free. There are plenty of source books now. And, with very little effort, you can use that 3e material if you actually see the rules changes. It isn't as difficult as you may think. There is a full character conversion guide for Pathfinder. Fairly straight forward. *The cost of crafting is still the largest; time. Most of the time an adventuring party in the common game has hardly enough time to make a mundane item, let alone a magical one due to the cost of time. XP was largely moot anyway, as the amount of exp used is mostly small later on; as most of the time you are making wands and consumables from a lower level. Also, neat thing is there is a feat that allows mundane characters to make wondrous items and magical arms and armor. The feat itself is a little wonky, but it does give a place to start for GM intervention, but frankly, if you don't want people crafting much, just don't give them the time for it, or limit how much money they get and instead give them more stuff that happens to be valuable. While both of us are simply stating our own opinion, possibly years after you posted this originally, I just have to be that guy, who says something negative about your opinion. In short; I disagree. 555277 (talk) 13:03, October 29, 2013 (UTC)